| An Experiment on a Bird in the Air Pump | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Artist | Joseph Wright of Derby |
| Year | 1768 |
| Medium | Oil on canvas |
| Dimensions | 183 cm × 244 cm (72 in × 94+1⁄2 in) |
| Location | National Gallery,London |
| Accession | NG725 |
An Experiment on a Bird in the Air Pump is a 1768oil-on-canvas painting byJoseph Wright of Derby, one of a number of candlelit scenes that Wright painted during the 1760s. The painting departed from convention of the time by depicting a scientific subject in the reverential manner formerly reserved for scenes of historical or religious significance. Wright was intimately involved in depicting theIndustrial Revolution and the scientific advances of theEnlightenment. While his paintings were recognized as exceptional by his contemporaries, his provincial status and choice of subjects meant the style was never widely imitated. The picture has been owned by theNational Gallery in London since 1863 and is regarded as a masterpiece of British art.
The painting depicts anatural philosopher, a forerunner of the modern scientist, recreating one ofRobert Boyle'sair pump experiments, in which a bird is deprived of air, before a group of onlookers. The group members exhibit a variety of reactions, such as grief, disbelief and dismay, but for most of the audience scientific curiosity overcomes concern for the bird. The central figure looks out of the picture as if inviting the viewer's participation in the outcome.
The painting was featured in the 1980BBC Two series100 Great Paintings.
In 1659, Robert Boyle commissioned the construction of an air pump, then described as a "pneumatic engine", which is known today as a "vacuum pump". The air pump was invented byOtto von Guericke in 1650, though its high cost deterred most contemporary scientists from constructing the apparatus. Boyle, the son of theEarl of Cork, had no such concerns—after its construction, he donated the initial 1659 model to theRoyal Society and had a further two redesigned machines built for his personal use. Aside from Boyle's three pumps, there were probably no more than four others in existence during the 1660s:Christiaan Huygens had one inThe Hague,Henry Power may have had one atHalifax, and there may have been pumps atChrist's College, Cambridge, and theMontmor Academy in Paris.[1] Boyle's pump, which was largely designed to Boyle's specifications and constructed byRobert Hooke, was complicated, temperamental, and problematic to operate. Many demonstrations could only be performed with Hooke on hand, and Boyle frequently left critical public displays solely to Hooke—whose dramatic flair matched his technical skill.[2]
Despite the operational and maintenance obstacles, construction of the pump enabled Boyle to conduct a great many experiments on the properties of air, which he later detailed in hisNew Experiments Physico-Mechanicall, Touching the Spring of the Air, and its Effects, (Made, for the Most Part, in a New Pneumatical Engine). In the book, he described in great detail 43 experiments he conducted, on occasion assisted by Hooke, on the effect of air on various phenomena. Boyle tested the effects of "rarified" air on combustion, magnetism, sound, and barometers, and examined the effects of increasedair pressure on various substances. He listed two experiments on living creatures: "Experiment 40", which tested the ability of insects to fly under reduced air pressure, and the dramatic "Experiment 41," which demonstrated the reliance of living creatures on air for their survival. In this attempt to discover something "about the account upon which "respiration" is so necessary to the "animals" that Nature hath furnished with Lungs." Boyle conducted numerous trials during which he placed a large variety of different creatures, including birds, mice, eels, snails and flies, in the vessel of the pump and studied their reactions as the air was removed.[3] Here, he describes an injuredlark:
... the Bird for a while appear'd lively enough; but upon a greater Exsuction of the Air, she began manifestly to droop and appear sick, and very soon after was taken with as violent and irregular Convulsions, as are wont to be observ'd in Poultry, when their heads are wrung off: For the Bird threw her self over and over two or three times, and dyed with her Breast upward, her Head downwards, and her Neck awry.[4]
By the time Wright painted his picture in 1768, air pumps were a relatively commonplace scientific instrument, and itinerant "lecturers innatural philosophy"—usually more showmen than scientists—often performed the "animal in the air pump experiment" as the centerpiece of their public demonstration.[5] These were performed in town halls and other large buildings for a ticket-buying audience, or were booked by societies or for private showings in the homes of the well-off, the setting suggested in both of Wright's demonstration pieces.[6] One of the most notable and respectable of the travelling lecturers wasJames FergusonFRS, a Scottish astronomer and probable acquaintance of Joseph Wright (both were friends ofJohn Whitehurst). Ferguson noted that a "lungs-glass" with a small air-filled bladder inside was often used in place of the animal, as using a living creature was "too shocking to every spectator who has the least degree of humanity".[7]
The full moon in the picture is significant as meetings of the Lunar Circle (renamed theLunar Society by 1775) were timed to make use of its light when traveling.
Wright metErasmus Darwin in the early 1760s, probably through their mutual connection,John Whitehurst In 1767, Wright first consulted Darwin regarding health concerns and stayed with the Darwin family for a week.[8] The energy and vivacity of both Erasmus and Mary (Polly) Darwin impressed Wright. In the 1980s Eric Evans (National Gallery) suggested that Darwin is the figure in the left foreground who holds a watch. As this composed timekeeper is not consistent with Darwin's flamboyant character, it is more likely that this is DrWilliam Small. The attention to timekeeping fits with Dr Small's role as the social secretary for the Lunar Circle. Small returned from Virginia in 1764 and established his practice in Birmingham in 1765, consistent with this being a meeting in 1767. The profile and wig of this figure are consistent with a contemporary portrait of Small byTilly Kettle.
During his apprenticeship and early career Wright concentrated on portraiture. By 1762, he was an accomplished portrait artist, and his 1764 group portraitJames Shuttleworth, his Wife and Daughter is acknowledged as his first true masterpiece.Benedict Nicolson suggests that Wright was influenced by the work ofThomas Frye; in particular by the 18 bust-lengthmezzotints which Frye completed just before his death in 1762. It was perhaps Frye's candlelight images that tempted Wright to experiment with subject pieces. Wright's first attempt,A Girl reading a Letter by Candlelight with a Young Man looking over her shoulder from 1762 or 1763, is a trial in the genre, and is fetching though uncomplicated.[9]Wright's,An Experiment on a Bird in the Air Pump forms part of a series of candlelitnocturnes that he produced between 1765 and 1768.
There was along history of painting candlelit scenes in Western art, although as Wright had not at this date traveled abroad, there remains uncertainty as to what paintings he might have seen in the original, as opposed toprints. Nicolson, who made studies of both Wright and other candlelight painters such as the 17th-centuryUtrecht Caravaggisti, thought their paintings, among the largest in the style, those most likely to have influenced Wright. However, Judy Egerton wonders if he could have seen any, referring to influences of the far smaller works of theLeiden fijnschilderGodfried Schalcken (1643–1706), whose reputation was much greater in the early 18th century than later. He had worked in England from 1692 to 1697, and several of his paintings can be placed in English collections.[10]
Although he was the leading expert writing in English, Nicolson does not suggest that Wright is likely to have known of the 17th-century candlelit narrative religious subjects ofGeorges de La Tour andTrophime Bigot, which, in their seriousness, are the closest works to Wright that are lit only by candle. The Dutch painters' works and other candlelit scenes by 18th-century English painters such as Henry Morland (father ofGeorge) tended instead to exploit the possibilities of semi-darkness for erotic suggestiveness. Some of Wright's own later candlelit scenes were by no means as serious as his first ones, as seen from their titles:Two Boys Fighting Over a Bladder andTwo Girls Dressing a Kitten by Candlelight.[11]
The first of his candlelit masterpieces,Three Persons Viewing the Gladiator by Candlelight, was painted in 1765, and showed three men studying a small copy of the "Borghese Gladiator".Viewing the Gladiator was greatly admired; but his next painting,A Philosopher giving that Lecture on the Orrery, in which a Lamp is put in place of the Sun (normally known by the shortened formA Philosopher Giving a Lecture on the Orrery or justThe Orrery), caused a greater stir, as it replaced the Classical subject at the center of the scene with one of a scientific nature. Wright's depiction of the awe produced by scientific "miracles" marked a break with traditions in which the artistic depiction of such wonder was reserved for religious events,[12] since to Wright the marvels of the technological age were as awe-inspiring as the subjects of the great religious paintings.[13]
In both of these works the candlelit setting had a realist justification. Viewing sculpture by candlelight, when the contours showed well and there might even be an impression of movement from the flickering light, was a fashionable practice described byGoethe.[14] In theorrery demonstration the shadows cast by the lamp representing the sun were an essential part of the display, used to demonstrateeclipses. However there seems no reason, other than heightened drama, to stage the air pump experiment in a room lit by a single candle, and in two later paintings of the subject byCharles-Amédée-Philippe van Loo the lighting is normal.[15]
The painting was one of a number of British works challenging the set categories of the rigid, French-dictatedhierarchy of genres in the late 18th century, as other types of painting aspired to be treated as seriously as the costumedhistory painting of a Classical or mythological subject. In some respects, theOrrery andAir Pump subjects resembledconversation pieces, then largely a form of middle-class portraiture, though soon to be given new status whenJohann Zoffany began to paint the royal family in about 1766. Given their solemn atmosphere however, and as it seems none of the figures are intended to be understood as portraits (even if models may be identified), the paintings can not be regarded as conversation pieces.[16] The 20th-century art historianEllis Waterhouse compares these two works to the "genre serieux" of contemporary French drama, as defined byDenis Diderot andPierre Beaumarchais, a view endorsed by Egerton.[17]
An anonymous review from the time called Wright "a very great and uncommon genius in a peculiar way."[18]The Orrery was painted without a commission, probably in the expectation that it would be bought byWashington Shirley,5th Earl Ferrers, an amateur astronomer who had anorrery of his own, and with whom Wright's friendPeter Perez Burdett was staying while inDerbyshire. Figures thought to be portraits of Burdett and Ferrers feature in the painting, Burdett taking notes and Ferrers seated with his son next to the orrery.[7]Ferrers purchased the painting for £210, butthe 6th Earl auctioned it off, and it is now held by theDerby Museum and Art Gallery.[19]
An Experiment on a Bird in the Air Pump followed in 1768, the emotionally charged experiment contrasting with the orderly scene fromThe Orrery. The painting, which measures 72 by 94½ inches (183 by 244 cm), shows a greycockatiel fluttering in panic as the air is slowly withdrawn from the vessel by the pump. The witnesses display various emotions: one of the girls worriedly watches the fate of the bird, while the other is too upset to observe and is comforted by her father; two gentlemen (one of them dispassionately timing the experiment) and a boy look on with interest, while the young lovers to the left of the painting are absorbed only in each other.[20] The scientist himself looks directly out of the picture, as if challenging the viewer to judge whether the pumping should continue, killing the bird, or whether the air should be replaced and the cockatiel saved.[21]
David Solkin suggests that little sympathy is directed toward the bird; the subjects of the painting show the dispassionate detachment of the evolving scientific society. Individuals are concerned for each other: the father for his children, the young man for the girl, but the distress of the cockatiel elicits only careful study.[22] Another reading is that interest in the bird increases from the left side to the right; viewers on the left are scientifically interested (older men and boy) or distracted (young lovers), while those on the right are concerned (girls, older man, assistant) or attending to those who are (father). To one side of the boy assistant at the right side in the rear, the cockatiel's empty cage can be seen on the wall, and to further heighten the drama it is unclear whether the boy is lowering the cage on the pulley to allow the bird to be replaced after the experiment or hoisting the cage back up, certain of its former occupant's death. It has also been suggested that he may be drawing the curtains to block out the light from the full moon.
Jenny Uglow believes that the boy echoes the figure in the last print ofWilliam Hogarth'sThe Four Stages of Cruelty by pointing out the arrogance and potential cruelty of experimentation,[19] while David Fraser also sees the compositional similarities with the audience grouped round a central demonstration.[24] The neutral stance of the central character and the uncertain intentions of the boy with the cage were both later ideas: an early study, discovered on the back of a self-portrait, omits the boy and shows the natural philosopher reassuring the girls. In this sketch it is obvious that the bird will survive, and thus the composition lacks the power of the final version.[25]Lochlann Jain has analyzed the painting in the context of a contemporary cultural history and medicine of human suffocation and choking.[26]Wright, who took many of his subjects from English poetry, probably knew the following passage from "The Wanderer" (1729) byRichard Savage:[27]
- So in some Engine, that denies a Vent,
- If unrespiring is some Creature pent,
- It sickens, droops, and pants, and gasps for Breath,
- Sad o'er the Sight swim shad'wy Mists of Death;
- If then kind Air pours powerful in again.
- New Heats, new Pulses quicken ev'ry Vein;
- From the clear'd, lifted, life-rekindled Eye,
- Dispers'd, the dark and dampy Vapours fly.
.jpg)
The cockatiel would have been a rare bird at the time, "and one whose life would never in reality have been risked in an experiment such as this".[28] It did not become well known until after it was shown in illustrations to the accounts of the voyages ofCaptain Cook in the 1770s. Prior to Cook's voyage, cockatiels had been imported only in small numbers as exotic cage-birds. Wright had painted one in 1762 at the home of William Chase, featuring it both in his portrait of Chase and his wife (Mr & Mrs William Chase) and a separate study,The Parrot.[29] In selecting such a rarity for this scientific sacrifice, Wright not only chose a more dramatic subject than the "lungs-glass", but was perhaps making a statement about the values of society in theAge of Enlightenment.[7] The grey plumage of the cockatiel also shows much more effectively in the darkened room than the small dull-coloured bird in Wright's earlyoil sketch.[28] A resemblance has been pointed out between the group of the bird and the two nearest figures and a type of depiction of theTrinity found inEarly Netherlandish painting, where theHoly Spirit is represented by a dove, to whichGod the Father (the philosopher) points, while Christ (the father) gestures in blessing to the viewer.[30]
On the table are various other pieces of equipment that the natural philosopher would have used during his demonstration: a thermometer, candle snuffer and cork, and close to the man seated to the right is a pair ofMagdeburg hemispheres, which would have been used with the air pump to demonstrate the difference in pressure exerted by the air and a vacuum: when the air was pumped out from between the two hemispheres they were impossible to pull apart. The air pump itself is rendered in exquisite detail, a faithful record of the designs in use at the time.[31] What may be a human skull in the large liquid-filled glass bowl would not have been a normal piece of equipment;[32] William Schupbach suggests that it and the candle, which is presumably lighting the bowl from behind, form avanitas—the two symbols of mortality reflecting the cockatiel's struggle for life.[29]
The powerful central light source creates achiaroscuro effect. The light illuminating the scene has been described as "so brilliant it could only be the light of revelation".[33] The single source of light is obscured behind the bowl on the table; some hint of a lamp glass can be seen around the side of the bowl, butDavid Hockney has suggested that the bowl itself may contain Sulphur, giving a powerful single light source that a candle or oil lamp would not.[34] In the earlier study a candle holder is visible, and the flame is reflected in the bowl. Hockneybelieves that many of theOld Masters used optical equipment to assist in their painting, and suggests that Wright may have used lenses to transfer the image to paper rather than painting directly from the scene, as he believes the pattern of shadows thrown by the lighting could have been too complicated for Wright to have captured so accurately without assistance.[34] It may be observed, however, that the stand on which the pump is situated casts no shadow on the body of the philosopher, as it could be expected to do.
Wright'sAir Pump was unusual in that it depicted archetypes rather than specific people, though various models for the figures have been suggested. The young lovers may have been based on Thomas Coltman and Mary Barlow, friends of Wright's, whom he later painted inMr and Mrs Thomas Coltman (also in the National Gallery) after their marriage in 1769;Erasmus Darwin has been suggested as the man timing the experiment on the left of the table, andJohn Warltire, whom Darwin had invited to help with some air pump experiments in real life, as the natural philosopher;[35] but Wright never identified any of the subjects or suggested they were based on real people.[7]
InThe Orrery, all the subjects have been identified apart from the philosopher, who has physical similarities toIsaac Newton but differs enough to make positive identification impossible. Nicolson detects the strong influence of Frye throughout the picture. Particularly striking is the similarity between Frye's mezzotintPortrait of a Young Man of 1760–1761 and the figure of the boy with his head cocked staring intently at the bird. In 1977, Michael Wynne published one of Frye's chalk drawings from around 1760,An old man leaning on a staff, which is so similar to the observer in the right foreground in Wright's picture to make it impossible that Wright had not seen it. There are other hints of Frye's style in the painting: even the figure of the natural philosopher has touches of Frye'sFigure with Candle. ThoughHenry Fuseli would later also develop on the style of Frye's work there is no evidence of him having painted anything similar until the early 1780s. So, although he had already been in England at the time theAir Pump was produced, it is unlikely that he was an influence on Wright.[36]
Wright's scientific paintings adopted elements from the tradition ofhistory painting but lacked the heroic central action typical of that genre. While ground-breaking, they are regarded as peculiar to Wright, whose unique style has been explained in many ways. Wright's provincial status and ties to theLunar Society, a group of prominent industrialists, scientists and intellectuals who met regularly in Birmingham between 1765 and 1813, have been highlighted, as well as his close association with and sympathy for the advances made in the burgeoningIndustrial Revolution. Other critics have emphasised a desire to capture a snapshot of the society of the day, in the tradition of William Hogarth but with a more neutral stance that lacks the biting satire of Hogarth's work.[37]
The scientific subjects of Wright's paintings from this time were meant to appeal to the wealthy scientific circles in which he moved. While never a member himself, he had strong connections with theLunar Society: he was friends with members John Whitehurst and Erasmus Darwin, as well asJosiah Wedgwood, who later commissioned paintings from him.[38] The inclusion of the moon in the painting was a nod to their monthly meetings, which were held when the moon was full. LikeThe Orrery, Wright apparently paintedAir Pump without a commission, and the picture was purchased by DrBenjamin Bates, who already owned Wright'sGladiator. An Aylesbury physician, patron of the arts and hedonist, Bates was a diehard member of theHellfire Club. Wright's account book shows a number of prices for the painting: Pd£200 is shown in one place and £210 in another, but Wright had written to Bates asking for £130, stating that the low price "might much injure me in the future sale of my pictures, and when I send you a receipt for the money I shall acknowledge a greater sum."[39] Whether Bates ever paid the full amount is not recorded; Wright only notes in his account book that he received £30 in part payment.[40]
Wright exhibited the painting at theSociety of ArtistsExhibition of 1768 and it was re-exhibited beforeChristian VII of Denmark in September the same year. Viewers remarked that it was "clever and vigorous",[29] whileGustave Flaubert, who saw it on a visit to England in 1865–66, considered it "charmant de naïveté et profondeur".[28] It was popular enough that a mezzotint was engraved from it byValentine Green which was published byJohn Boydell on 24 June 1769,[40] and initially sold for 15shillings. This was reprinted throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, in increasingly weak impressions.[41] Ellis Waterhouse called it "one of the wholly original masterpieces of British art".[42]
From Bates, the picture passed to Walter Tyrell; another member of the Tyrell family, Edward, presented it to theNational Gallery, London, in 1863, after it had failed to sell at an auction atChristie's in 1854. The painting was transferred to theTate Gallery in 1929, although it was actually on loan toDerby Museum and Art Gallery between 1912 and 1947. It has been lent out for exhibitions to theNational Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C., in 1976, theNational Museum of Fine Arts in Stockholm in 1979–1980, and Paris (Grand Palais), New York (Metropolitan) and the Tate in London in 1990. It was reclaimed by the National Gallery from the Tate in 1986.[43] They describe its condition as good, with minor alterations visible on some figures. It was last cleaned in 1974.[44] In 2025, it was the subject of its own exhibition at the National Gallery entitledWright of Derby: From the Shadows. That exhibit prompted aBBC Online article weighing whether it could be considered the first work ofmodern art.[45]
The striking scene has been used as the cover illustration for many books on topics both artistic and scientific. It has even spawned pastiches and parodies: the book cover ofThe Science of Discworld, byTerry Pratchett,Ian Stewart andJack Cohen, is a tribute to the painting by artistPaul Kidby, who replaces Wright's figures with the book's protagonists.Shelagh Stephenson's playAn Experiment with an Air Pump, inspired by the painting, was the joint winner of the 1997Margaret Ramsay Award and had its premiere at theRoyal Exchange Theatre, Manchester, in 1998.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)